1
1
0
Foot Hood shooting victim, Shawn Manning, who was shot a total of 6 times during the attack, will not get combat benefits, ie. disability, healthcare, etc.
He was just awarded the Purple Heart tho. We can agree that BO finally did the right thing in calling the Ft Hood Massacre what it really was, An act of terrorism. Until then, no soldier was allowed any benefits because it was first deemed Workplace violence. We all understand this I hope.
But, somehow, he has been rejected by a physical evaluation board because "of the narrow interpretation of the law..."
The NDAA section 571 States:
"COVERED MEMBERS.—(1) A member described in this subsection
is a member on active duty who was killed or wounded in
an attack by a foreign terrorist organization in circumstances where
the death or wound is the result of an attack targeted on the member
due to such member’s status as a member of the armed forces,
unless the death or wound is the result of willful misconduct of the
member.
‘‘(2) For purposes of this section, an attack by an individual or entity
shall be considered to be an attack by a foreign terrorist organization
if—
‘‘(A) the individual or entity was in communication with the
foreign terrorist organization before the attack; and
‘‘(B) the attack was inspired or motivated by the foreign terrorist
organization."
But because the words "The victim will get healthcare benefits as well as disability" have been omitted in that section, he has been DENIED.
How can this be allowed to happen?? What do you purpose the end result will be? Who is to blame?
He was just awarded the Purple Heart tho. We can agree that BO finally did the right thing in calling the Ft Hood Massacre what it really was, An act of terrorism. Until then, no soldier was allowed any benefits because it was first deemed Workplace violence. We all understand this I hope.
But, somehow, he has been rejected by a physical evaluation board because "of the narrow interpretation of the law..."
The NDAA section 571 States:
"COVERED MEMBERS.—(1) A member described in this subsection
is a member on active duty who was killed or wounded in
an attack by a foreign terrorist organization in circumstances where
the death or wound is the result of an attack targeted on the member
due to such member’s status as a member of the armed forces,
unless the death or wound is the result of willful misconduct of the
member.
‘‘(2) For purposes of this section, an attack by an individual or entity
shall be considered to be an attack by a foreign terrorist organization
if—
‘‘(A) the individual or entity was in communication with the
foreign terrorist organization before the attack; and
‘‘(B) the attack was inspired or motivated by the foreign terrorist
organization."
But because the words "The victim will get healthcare benefits as well as disability" have been omitted in that section, he has been DENIED.
How can this be allowed to happen?? What do you purpose the end result will be? Who is to blame?
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
I say that all should make their voices heard! Contact your representatives and call for a fair change because it is the right thing to do!
(1)
(0)
It's a shame they are victimized again by the government. On a few occasions where the regulations were fuzzy I looked at what was good for the soldier vs the army. We should show more compassion sometimes.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I'm appalled. I hear they are trying to figure and work this out, but this shouldn't even be an issue. Just AMAZED! I guess admitting that a terrorist attack happened on American soil is just too much. Because America isn't at war with anyone... AT HOME. *eye roll* I don't get it.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next